backtop


Print 98 comment(s) - last by The Raven.. on Sep 26 at 10:53 AM


Dr. Ivar Giaever  (Source: newmediajournal.us)
Dr. Ivar Giaever announced his resignation Tuesday, September 13

A well-known physicist has resigned from his position with the American Physical Society (APS) due to its recent policy stating that global warming is real.

Dr. Ivar Giaever, a 1973 Nobel Prize winner in physics and former professor with the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, announced his resignation from the APS on Tuesday, September 13, 2011.

The APS' official policy supports the theory that human actions have inexorably caused the warming of the Earth through heightened carbon dioxide emissions.

Giaever responded by refusing to pay his annual dues, and writing an email to Kate Kirby, executive officer of the physics society, saying that he disagreed with this policy.

The following is the email sent from Giaever to Kirby on September 13:

From: Ivar Giaever [ mailto:giaever@XXXX.com]

Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:42 PM
To: kirby@aps.org
Cc: Robert H. Austin; 'William Happer'; 'Larry Gould'; 'S. Fred Singer'; Roger Cohen
Subject: I resign from APS

Dear Ms. Kirby

Thank you for your letter inquiring about my membership. I did not renew it because I can not live with the statement below:

 

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring.
If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period.

 

Best regards,

 

Ivar Giaever

 

Nobel Laureate 1973

 

PS. I included a copy to a few people in case they feel like using the information.


Ivar Giaever
XXX XXX
XXX
USA
Phone XXX XXX XXX
Fax XXX XXX XXX

According to the Wall Street Journal, Giaever announced he was an avid global warming skeptic in 2008, saying that global warming was "becoming a religion."

"I am Norwegian, should I really worry about a little bit of warming?," said Giaever in 2008. "I am unfortunately becoming an old man. We have heard many similar warnings about the acid rain 30 years ago and the ozone hole 10 years ago or deforestation but the humanity is still around. The ozone hole width has peaked in 1993. Moreover, global warming has become a new religion. We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important. We don't really know what the actual effect on the global temperature is. There are better ways to spend the money."

Giaever, who earned his Nobel Prize for his experimental discoveries with tunneling phenomena in superconductors, joined more than 100 signers of a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama criticizing his position on climate change in 2009.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Well that's one denier...
By SPOOFE on 9/15/2011 4:47:19 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
People to this very day still believe the dust bowl was caused by natural weather changes

People to this very day still believe that the world is flat. Some believe the world is 6000 years old and has been completely stable the entire time. Some believe the world is hollow and lizard men live inside; others believe that WE live inside, and that the entire universe we see is at the core.

People believe that the world is populated by spirit energy that gets into our brains and pollutes our thoughts. People believe that all life is worthless and should be destroyed. People believe that people are tasty snacks.

The overall point is that people believe some wacky, crazy things.

However, the vast majority of people believe some relatively sane, usual, unspectacular things. For instance, some people believe that the connection between carbon output and climate change has not been conclusively established, certainly not to the point of being "indisputable", and have very serious concerns about such a dogmatic stance invading the world of scientific study. Note that it's much easier to compare these people to those with inaccurate beliefs about the dust bowl than it is to actually engage their real concerns.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By Ringold on 9/15/2011 5:00:03 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, and his resignation letter focused on the word incontrovertible. Here most of us were, thinking nothing was incontrovertible; only holy scripture and its acolytes use such words.

Well, religious zealots and the APS, apparently? That was this guys point, or thats how I took it.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By dgingerich on 9/15/2011 5:48:29 PM , Rating: 2
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By Starcub on 9/16/2011 2:48:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes, and his resignation letter focused on the word incontrovertible. Here most of us were, thinking nothing was incontrovertible; only holy scripture and its acolytes use such words. Well, religious zealots and the APS, apparently? That was this guys point, or thats how I took it.

It is incontrovertible that I will die.

Wow! I never realized that I am a religious zealot and that I'm right because holy scripture tells me I am.

Thanks!


RE: Well that's one denier...
By Solandri on 9/16/2011 1:38:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is incontrovertible that I will die.

Which is false because you can't be 100% sure you're actually alive. You, I, and reality may just be a simulation run on some grand computer. Maybe we've had this debate countless times before when the simulation was restarted from a save point, but we only remember the current iteration.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By lelias2k on 9/15/2011 5:01:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For instance, some people believe that the connection between carbon output and climate change has not been conclusively established, certainly not to the point of being "indisputable", and have very serious concerns about such a dogmatic stance invading the world of scientific study.


Agreed. But let's for instance stop thinking about global warming for a second. If you ever paid attention to the sky on a cloudless days in cities like LA, NY, Sao Paulo, Mexico City, etc, you'd think that would be enough to convince ppl that we need to change whatever we're doing. Shouldn't it?

Morpheus: Do you think that's air you're breathing now?


RE: Well that's one denier...
By Flux0r on 9/15/2011 5:28:30 PM , Rating: 2
If you can be convinced of anything by merely "paying attention to the sky", you probably shouldn't be in a position to change anything about whatever it is people are doing.

Remember the discussion is about the link between climate change and carbon emissions.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By wordsworm on 9/16/2011 5:29:20 AM , Rating: 2
He also inferred that the anthropomorphic effect on the ozone hole and acid rain are also busted myths. I'm surprised he didn't try to bust the DDT myth.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By shiftypy on 9/16/2011 7:05:16 AM , Rating: 2
I was young then, but AFAIK ozone layer thing was proper science. The link between halocarbons and ozone was proved and stuff was banned and all was well.
In this case there is no clear link between CO2 and warming or humans and warming. Multitude of factors is involved neither of which we can really cut like we did with freon.
So it is bad science and populism that this Nobel scientist is against. And I agree with him


RE: Well that's one denier...
By wordsworm on 9/16/2011 7:27:21 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but he seems to be saying that it was a myth that people were the cause of the effect.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By lelias2k on 9/17/2011 2:20:13 AM , Rating: 2
You missed my point completely.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By Scott66 on 9/15/2011 5:32:23 PM , Rating: 2
You are seeing pollution not carbon dioxide. They are two very different events.

We can control pollution. Global warming and Carbon dioxide just might be outside our control.


RE: Well that's one denier...
By bug77 on 9/15/2011 5:48:15 PM , Rating: 3
That's one of the dumbest argument I keep hearing from environmentalists. It's akin to cutting your arm off to treat a cut to your thumb.

Yes, we need to take care of the environment. But if you go mindlessly spending billions on false problems, you'll end up not taking care of the real ones.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki